Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1
Jan 20, 2013 3:00am EST
the dr. felt that he or she was not adequately, legally covered, or might have been breaking the law if they performed it. i would also ask to touch on one other issue which is being mentioned in the other house of parliament. that is the distinction between a termination which is necessary to specifically save the life of the mother, as opposed to for the health of the mother. because that is being advanced. my own sense, i may be being medically naÏve, but there are conditions that threaten your health, but to a small extent threaten your life, and as such, it is probably not a huge issue. i would also like to ask you to clarify, -- sorry we will not be going into medical details. is it ever necessary in performing a life-saving termination of pregnancy, to specifically kill the fetus in utero? or can the pregnancy be delivered to give the life- saving indication which the woman needs question mark i know this is something that others have raised in objection. also to clarify something from earlier, a hospital in the u.k. where the anesthesiologist refused to anesthetize the patie
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1